MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510417393 · doi:10.1920/re.ifs.2024.0837

Parental income and child outcomes: what can we learn from material deprivation?

2005· report· en· W2510417393 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alissa Goodman, Michał Myck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyGovernment (linguistics)Child povertyQuarter (Canadian coin)Baseline (sea)Low incomeDemographic economicsEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the Government put reducing child poverty at the centre of its domestic policy agenda since 1999, it has introduced a programme of very big increases in benefits and tax credits for families with children. Although such increases almost by definition help the Government to meet its proximate policy aims, namely to reduce incomebased measures of child poverty, by a quarter relative to a 1998-99 baseline by 2004-05, and by one half by 2010-11, it remains an open question whether, and how much these financial transfers will have affected other, possibly more meaningful, measures of well-being, besides income.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Issues and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207